Water Board Race
Campaign Disclosure Irregularities
Part 4

Demand for Disclosure to Public
 
This web page is http://obri.net/rl/hhdisclosure4.html
a web page by Jay O'Brien
10/30/02

Click here for part 1
Click here for part 3
Click here for part 5
Click here for the summary
Other Election Issues
Direct links  in this web page
Email to Rio Linda Net transmitting message to Harris and Hood, 10/29/02:
Mary Harris response, 10/30/02:

Preface

This page, part 4, includes my demands to candidates Harris and Hood for the disclosures required by law. Using private email, I asked for their responses within 24 hours, but my request was not honored. After that, I posted my request to the Rio Linda Net, the community mailing list, and obtained reactions and responses; one response was from from Harris. I asked her if she intended to issue a disclosure before the election.

Jay O'Brien
October 30, 2002

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Pay for Play?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 15:33:50 -0800
From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>
To: Rio Linda Elverta Mailing List <riolinda@vrx.net>

To Water District Voters, Mary Harris and Cathy Hood:

When Mary Harris and Cathy Hood filed as election candidates they signed a statement agreeing to stay under $1000, avoiding the campaign disclosure law required reporting of contributions, contributors, expenditures and creditors.

Once they opted to accept $1000, they were required by law to notify their opponents, the County and the State within 48 hours. They were then also required to make regular disclosure reports to the public, exactly the same as do the candidates for Governor or any other office.

The ladies failed to comply with the 48 hour law, faxing their opponents after 8 days; the State and County received copies after 15 days.

Even though required by law, they have not identified the source of at least $400 in reported contributions, and their debt disclosure shows that as much as $560 may have been written off by creditors, who then also become contributors. On the other hand, they may be concealing their errors in filling out the disclosure forms, which are about as difficult as balancing a checking account.

Failure to comply with election related laws can place the outcome of the election in question, perhaps even obliging the Water District to call a costly special election.

As a member of the public, I demanded the ladies provide me the disclosure information required by law. They have not responded. What do they have to hide? Who is bankrolling them? Is this another "Pay for Play" situation? Why can't Harris and Hood follow the law?

I am repeating the specific requests below that I emailed to the ladies. I have received no response.

See http://obri.net for details; Select "Election 2002".

Jay O'Brien

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Campaign Disclosure Demand
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 13:56:26 -0800
From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>
To: Mary Harris,  Cathy Hood

To RLECWD Director candidates Mary Harris and Cathy Hood:

The Political Reform Act of 1974 as amended was enacted to require timely provision to the public of the identity of contributors to candidates and the amounts they give; in addition it requires timely provision to the public of information on candidate expenditures and unpaid bills.

This is a demand for such campaign information you did not timely disclose for public review as required by said Political Reform Act of 1974.

Please provide the following information to me that is missing from your Recipient Committee Campaign Statements filed on October 7 and 24, 2002, to wit:
  1. Disclosure identifying the source of contributions to your committee equaling the $400 difference between the total amount of $1400 you reported as received in $100 or larger contributions and the $1000 total of the contributions detailed as received. The contributions may be identified in your Bank of the West account ledger, as all contributions must have been deposited in that account.
  2. Disclosure identifying the Creditor of $100 of outstanding debt that is included in the 9/30/02 Unpaid Bills Summary of $560 yet is not included in the detailed 9/30/02 disclosure that identifies a Creditor with $460 in unpaid bills.
  3. Disclosure of the apparent retirement of the 9/30/02 accrued expenses of $560 that is not identified in the statement you filed covering the period October 1 through October 19, 2002. In fact, an Accrued Expenses disclosure was not included with this statement to identify the outstanding balance at the beginning of the October disclosure period.
More detail on these items, references, and scans of the documents you filed may be found on my web pages at http://obri.net/rl/election2002.html .

Given the pendent election, I expect a response within 24 hours.

Thank you,

Jay O'Brien
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
I understand that the sender of the following message is Cathy Hood's brother.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Pay for Play?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 00:44:06 EST
From: (Doug Nelson)
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Jay, once again, you do not have your facts correct.  Mary Harris and Cathy Hood have filed all of the appropriate forms at the voter registration office, and in a timely manner.  Unlike the other candidates who are unwilling to admit that they have spent and or received $1000 or more on their campaign, you can go BACK down to the voter registration office and the supervisor down there will tell you ONCE AGAIN that Mary Harris and Cathy Hood have filled out and filed all forms correctly.  In fact, the supervisor may even reveal to you that what you are doing by publishing your misinformation is illegal and harassment, and that it was suggested that Mary Harris and Cathy Hood go to the Federal Political Party Commission (FPPC) and file a complaint based on your unfounded accusations.  When are you going to give it a rest??? 

You know, I REALLY find it hard to believe that Cater and Gluvers have not spent over $1000 on  all of their MANY signs and their brochures and cute little buttons...I'm sure all that cost a pretty penny.  And how much did it cost Doug Cater to join the republican party?  Isn't that $950 right there?  Who's bankrolling who? 

I'm glad that Mary Harris and Cathy Hood are focusing on the more important issues rather than who spent more on their campaign.  Are you just trying to distract people from the real issues Jay?  Stop this pettiness and get a life.

Doug Nelson

>From the Rio Linda mailing list

My response to Mr. Nelson:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Pay for Play?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 13:19:13 -0800
From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>
To: Rio Linda Elverta Mailing List <riolinda@vrx.net>

Doug,

In your message you assert "Mary Harris and Cathy Hood have filed all of the appropriate forms at the voter registration office, and in a timely manner."

The letters handed to Cathy Hood and to Mary Harris on October 24 by Voter Registration and Elections confirm filings were not timely and confirm that required entries were incorrect or missing. The letter and its detail sheet may be viewed on my web page at: http://obri.net/rl/hhdisclosure2.html#hood

The facts I have cited show that the ladies did not comply with the 48 hour notification law, and that their disclosures are incomplete or incorrect.

Doug, only one of us is truthful. Are you suggesting that the letters I have posted are forgeries or somehow out of context?

Jay O'Brien
This response to my "Pay for Play" message is from candidate Mary Harris:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Pay for Play?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 08:40:59 -0800
From: "Mary Harris"
To: <riolinda@vrx.net>

Jay, Please be sure you include in your letter, that our opponents Doug Cater or Joe Gluvers have not filed anything with the Secretary of State or the County disclosing that they have spent or received contribution totaling that $1000 threshold.

(My message of October 29 at 15:33 was included here as part of this Mary Harris email)




Candidate Joe Gluvers response to Mary Harris:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [RL] Pay for Play?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:39:33 -0800
From: "Joe Gluvers" <gluvers@covad.net>
To: <riolinda@vrx.net>

Mary,

Doug & I developed a campaign budget and it fell well under the discloser limits. We have used all of the resources available to us to stay within our budget.

We presume that the voters would like us to run the water board in a similar manner.

Joe Gluvers


My response to Mary Harris:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Pay for Play?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 13:25:57 -0800
From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>
To: Rio Linda Elverta Mailing List <riolinda@vrx.net>

Mary,

Thank you for your response, in which you repeat my demand to you and Cathy Hood for campaign disclosures as required by law.

Do you intend to issue the required disclosures before the election?

Jay O'Brien
jump to top of page

Click here to advance to part 5